TOPICS
TOPICS
OPM seeks 'rigorous and realistic' executive ratings
A top Office of Personnel Management official said Thursday that federal agencies must do a more credible job of distributing performance ratings among their top executives if a new performance-based pay system for Senior Executive Service members is to succeed.
The pay-for-performance effort is "contingent on appraisal systems making meaningful distinctions" among executives' performance, said Doris Hausser, a senior adviser to OPM Director Kay Coles James.
On Wednesday, OPM Wednesday released the results of fiscal 2002 SES performance evaluations, noting that many agencies had made strides in identifying truly exceptional employees.
"A growing number of agencies have taken seriously the need to improve the distribution of SES ratings and awards," James said in a recent memorandum to agency chiefs. "The necessity for more rigorous and realistic ratings is especially clear in instances where agencies are not fulfilling their missions and reporting demonstrable results."
According to OPM data, the number of SES members rated in the top level of their evaluation system declined from 84 percent in fiscal 2001 to about 75 percent in fiscal 2002. The number of SES members who received performance awards dropped slightly, from 52 percent to 50 percent.
Hausser singled out the Energy Department for showing particular discretion. In fiscal 2001, 99 percent of SES members at Energy were in the top rating level. In fiscal 2002, however, only 18 percent were. She praised Energy officials for being "judicious" and providing "reliable, valid" ratings.
Other agencies - especially those that use a three-level rating system - did not diversify their ratings. The Office of the Secretary of Defense rated all but one of its 398 SES members at the highest possible level. The Social Security Administration rated all of its 116 SES members at the top level.
Given the diverse systems that are used to measure SES performance, Hausser said it would be tempting to propose a governmentwide rating mechanism. To try and force a "cookie cutter approach," however, would probably not work, she said.
"A performance management system needs to be owned and operated by the agency," Hausser said.
COMMENTS
- This is a joke, right? Just like the "joke" that pay for performance is. And if you don't get the joke, it will hit you where it hurts--in the pocket. The SES is just the upper level of the good 'ol boys club. Don't get me wrong. I know many of them work very hard and do very good work. But the majority are probably like the ones we have where I work. Totally unaware of the rules and regulations, but demanding that you get them what they want when they want. AND THE RULES BE DAMNED! if it interferes with what they want. Even with the 5-step rating system, no SES will ever be rated that they don't get a "performance bonus". But, being in DoD, I'm sure that there will be plenty of money in the pot for all of us hard workers to get our fair share of those performance bonuses once we're under a Pay for Performance system. I have much confidence in this. NOT! And if you believe that YOU will get what you deserve under Bush's pay for performance system for DoD and DHS, you only need vote for that in November. I'm sure Bush will fund it adequately IF ONLY WE VOTE FOR HIM IN NOVEMBER. I'm tired of fairy tales. I have no confidence that there will EVER be adequate funding for pay for performance within DoD so long as Bush is in the White House. Adequate pay for adequate performance only works if there is money in the pot to fund it. Under Bush, we have NO TAX and SPEND A LOT. I'm voting in November for ANYONE ELSE. I encourage anyone who wants to continue to be able to put food on the table and a roof over their families heads to vote for the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. Bush is a deadly disaster for civil servants. GovExec.com reader Posted February 24, 2004 10:55 AM
- Again its backwards. The SES was originally established to be a cadre of professional managers, who could go anywhere to manage regardless of the program. I've dealt with SES managers in human resources on hundreds of issues for over 14 years. The SES turned into a cadre of super technical experts very well equiped to run the various programs of the federal government, but very ill equipped to handle HR issues and problems. And most SESers I've encountered would be lost if uprooted from their technical program and dropped into different soil. Performance Management and critical elements for the SES should concentrate on human resource. More importantly, SESer's should never retire and die in place. A part of their development must include mandatory rotations through different federal entities. The SES cadre needs to go back and become what is was always meant to be- a cadre of professional managers. If you want to pay technical experts for their technical expertise, call them Senior Level Service-SLers folks. But let the SERSer's manage the human resources! HR Specialist GovExec.com reader Posted February 24, 2004 8:03 AM
- The rating for any manager should, in part, include the rating of that manager by their subordinates! GovExec.com reader Posted February 20, 2004 6:53 AM
